4.7 Article

Identification, analysis and dissemination of information on near misses: A case study in the construction industry

Journal

SAFETY SCIENCE
Volume 48, Issue 1, Pages 91-99

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.06.006

Keywords

Near misses; Incident reporting systems; Performance measurement; Safety management

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Near misses are well-known for providing a major source of useful information for safety management. They are more frequent events than accidents and their causes may potentially result in an accident under slightly different circumstances. Despite the importance of this type of feedback, there is little knowledge on the characteristics of near misses, and on the use of this information in safety management. This article proposes guidelines for identifying, analyzing and disseminating information on near misses in construction sites. In particular, it is proposed that near misses be analyzed based on four categories: (a) whether or not it was possible to track down the event; (b) the nature of each event, in terms of its physical features (e.g. falling objects); (c) whether they provided positive or negative feedback for the safety management system; and (d) risk, based on the probability and severity associated with each event. The guidelines were devised and tested while a safety management system was being developed in a healthcare building project. The monitoring of near misses was part of a safety performance measurement system. Among the main results, a dramatic increase in both the number and quality of reports stands out after the workforce was systematically encouraged to report. While in the first 4 months of the study - when the workforce was not encouraged to report - there were just 12 reports, during the subsequent 4 months - when the workforce was so encouraged - there were 110 reports, all of them being analyzed based on the four analytical categories proposed. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available